Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
SCIENTISTS EXPRESSED “SURPRISE and delight” today after a new humpback dolphin species was identified off northern Australia, with genetic mapping singling out an animal not previously known to science.
A global team led by the US-based Wildlife Conservation Society made the discovery after examining almost 200 dead dolphins and tissue specimens from live animals across the four Atlantic, Indian and Indo-Pacific ocean areas where humpbacks are known to live.
A study of the beak length and number of teeth in 180 skulls from beached and museum specimens, as well as live DNA samples from 235 dolphins, identified a new species in the humpback, or sousa genus, which frequents waters off northern Australia.
“Based on our combined genetic and morphological analyses, there is convincing evidence for at least four species within the genus,” lead author Martin Mendez wrote in the paper, published in the latest edition of the journal Molecular Ecology, adding that this included “a new as-yet-unnamed species off northern Australia”.
Completely new species
Biologist Guido Parra, a member of the study team from Australia’s Flinders University, said it had long been debated that local humpbacks were distinct from their more distant cousins but there had been insufficient evidence until now to support the hypothesis.
“The unique thing about this study is that in previous debates the data sets were always limited – either purely genetic or based on traditional taxonomic studies,” Parra told AFP.
“We were able to actually marry those two – so morphological and genetic – and not only marry those two approaches but also look across the entire (genus) range.
“We are very surprised and of course delighted to discover the recognition of a completely new species.”
Significant finding
Humpback dolphins have a vast home range stretching from the tip of Australia all the way to Africa, and they are considered native to some 40 countries across Asia, Africa and the Pacific.
Parra gathered skin biopsy samples from both deceased and live humpbacks off northern Australia for the study, which he said was a “long-term collaborative global project”.
The Wildlife Conservation Society said it was a significant finding – identifying a new mammal species is rare – and that it hoped it would boost conservation efforts.
Two of the three already-identified sousa species are in decline and considered at risk from habitat loss and fishing, with S. chinensis, or Chinese white dolphin, found in the eastern Indian and West Pacific Oceans, listed as near-threatened by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.
S. teuszii, which lives in the Atlantic off West Africa and is known as the Atlantic humpback or Teusz’s dolphin, is rated vulnerable.
The next step in the process would be to draw up a manuscript of the findings for consideration by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, the body responsible for formally declaring and naming new species.
Parra said he could not reveal what potential names were being debated for the new humpback but said it would hopefully be “related to Australia”.
Lost world
It has been a bumper week for Australian scientists, with the discovery unveiled Monday of three new vertebrate species in a remote part of the country’s north, isolated for millions of years and described as a “lost world”.
Humpback dolphins are so named due to a distinctive hump just below their dorsal fin, which is also uniquely elongated.
Infant humpbacks are born a creamy or pearly white similar to a beluga whale and darken to grey as they reach adulthood. They typically grow to eight feet in length and live in coastal waters, deltas and estuaries.
- © AFP 2013.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
How bout longer sentences for the people committing the crimes and then in turn there will be less people needing to hide behind the screens
@Dlow Brown: careful, the liberal left brigade and their allies the Irish Council for Civil Liberties will have you shut down for hate speech!
@Damien Mooney: your an idiot the vast majority of people want longer sentences regardless of political leanings
@Kevin Finnegan: can please elect some of this vast majority so that they reflect they opinions of the vast majority.
@Dave Doyle: Judges aren’t elected.
@Lisa Saputo: the elected officials make laws….those laws can include mandatory minimum sentences or whatever the law makers set as the law. The law makers need to be tougher…IMHO. Then the judges will not be able to squirm out. We could very easily have a 3 strikes out law
@Dave Doyle: @Dave Doyle: well said. The ‘vast majority’ are happy to peddle faux outrage. Signing the latest petition on change.org to have Martin Nolan fired while banging furiously into their keyboards such inane comments as “there are no words”
“Should rot in hell”
“Suspended sentence a joke”
“Down with this sort of thing”
“Have they no homes to go to”
@Kevin Finnegan: ah right, so this elusive bunch of people known as ‘the majority of people’ elected you as their spokesman? What are you and your merry band of followers doing about lenient sentences then, apart from writing asinine, meaningless sentences into the journal.ie ? How many letters have you sent to the dept of justice and law reform, and the DPP herself, asking that lenient sentences be reviewed? Perhaps we could meet up and pursue a strategy, I’ve sent several so far this year with a few more ready to go.
Or are you happy to peddle your faux outrage on Facebook in the faint hope that Ms Loftus will log into the journal.ie and read your comments and discover the horror of Martin Nolan’s work?
@Damien Mooney: haha I’ve never met or talked to anybody who was like you know what our criminal justice system really does the job well why should people get long sentences sure just give them a slap on the wrist and it’ll be grand! And as to what I do about it I try my best to be informed and vote for someone who shares my belief that there needs to be serious reform. It’s gas that you started going of on all that when my original comment was about you basically saying only people on the right care about stuff like this
@Damien Mooney: haha faux outrage you know f&ck all about me but sure believe whatever you want and just smear people on the left to make yourself feel good
About time this has been the norm in the UK for years
@Sonya Couch Dillon: VERY TRUE, & also in fact, ( to save some extra, IMO, monies on the transport of Criminals, as they are mostly brought to & from the Courts by private securicor type firms ) Judges & Govenors can order a video-link from the prison to the Court, & that goes from your Tax evader to the more Heinous Murderer type crimes & Screens & video-link testimonies have been in use in the UK for some time now, although there is some speculation that the “evidence” may not be as pure as an actual person in the Courtroom as opposed to a “link”.https://www.eyenetwork.com/judicial/court-video-link/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwxtPYBRD6ARIsAKs1XJ5wX0SUMQncL-BPsfdJr4WF7O-F_chW3TUUB9Y0sWu05GVoEJE1GcYaAvHVEALw_wcB
@Michael Kelly: Video link in operation here too, but our system is slightly different. A prisoner has a right to be present . As for the private security companies , too easily infiltrated by crime gangs.
@Michael Kelly: Careful there, You’re interfering with the super incomes of the legal profession!
Now get wrid of the stupid “reducing”of sentences and let them serve a full sentence. Also lock up repeat offenders for robbery, serious assault or any repeated crimes.
@Mick12:
The reduction in the sentence on foot of a plea of guilty is pragmatism on the part of judges to reduce the waiting list of cases. The reduction is relatively small and criminals convicted of serious sexual offences are listed on the sex offenders register so that there are legal grounds for monitoring them closely after they have served their sentences.
@Mick12: Will never happen here. Sure would’nt it be an injustice not to fill the pockets of the poor auld Ambulance chasers.
Long over due ,glad to see some one is listening .
More prisons please and longer sentences. That is what people want. Imagine the money saved from criminals not being able to father children, save on children’s allowance, save on future criminals ever being born, save on council housing, save on dole money for future offspring etc etc.
Indeed , aren’t we all behind a screen giving evidence in some way
@Noel Walsh: deep
@Noel Walsh: give it a rest noel
@Noel Walsh: Did you forget to switch accounts before replying to yourself?
@Free comment ratings: Ha ! He’s got you there Noel !
This is all about gradually changing the rules of evidence in order to tip the balance against the accused (who in any just society must be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of law). What it will lead to is the thwarting of justice, where more innocent men, who have been maliciously (falsely) accused of rape or sexual assault, will be convicted and their lives destroyed. It is the holy grail of feminazis and the large misandrist element within the media, and certain political organisations, to prevent the full and fair cross-examination of complainants in court (such cross-examination being necessary in order to get to the truth and a just outcome in such cases). It is all part of the downgrading of evidence and examination.
Where man-haters want to get to is the point where all requirements for evidence and examination are dispensed with, and a potentially innocent man’s life can be destroyed in law simply by the word of a woman, even if she is not telling the truth.
I agree entirely with the contents of the ministerial order (and a new sentencing guideline) however the aspect preventing cross examination (as reported above) is incompatible with Art 38.1 and the established dicta in [In Re Haughey, 1IR1, 1971] and European conventions. It wouldn’t surprise me if there was a challenge to that section of the order alone. Imagine acting for yourself and, in your own defense you weren’t allowed ask certain questions or challenge the prosecution evidence or put your own case forward in rebuttal. Just doesn’t seem right.
Even the headline in this media article is deliberately misleading. Complainants during such cases are not “victims”, as in the middle of a trial (particularly trials involving alleged sexual offences) it has not yet been proven that a crime has been committed, nor that the accused has done it. One only becomes a “victim” if it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt in court that a crime has been committed, and that the accused is guilty.
have your say